Killary Clinton, The Donald, or Jill Stein: The US Election

[Laura]

By accepting long-term rule under Putin, even though of course it was all cleverly arranged 'by the book' (of 'Democracy'), Russians are pretty much signalling that they see through the pretense to recognize the underlying 'natural order'.

That's interesting,can you guys provide a link to the information regarding ''kingship'' or people preferring a benevolent monarch or however one might refer to it?I'd like to learn more about this.

Pierre wrote a good article about this here: https://www.sott.net/article/309526-The-Fear-of-Death-and-the-Human-Need-for-Heroes

Ernest Becker's Denial of Death:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Denial_of_Death

Full text: https://archive.org/stream/DenialOfDeath/DenialOfDeath_djvu.txt

 

[axj]

[quote author= Mark]The deep state/secret government seem to be trying to get rid of most of us.

Yes, I think that was always on the cards. Or at least one of those possible futures. According to the C’s Tony Blair already received his ''I am the Hell out of here'' ticket/seat when/if the end of the World hits.

If the PTB loses their global dominance why not reset the whole thing through whatever means. But rebuilding the world on a nuclear wasted planet is not really ideal to say the last.

I wonder if they really thought this through. They are just a bunch of dumb James Bond villains.
[/quote]

I don't think that many of them are supporting the "blowing eveything up" idea. Most of them spent too much effort on establishing their power, though if that starts to slip away, all bets are off. As of now, I'd say they are still pretty comfortable.

And didn't the C's basically say that aliens would not allow us to blow up "their" planet? The fact that UFO's have often been sighted at nuclear facilities and even deactivated them at times, points towards this being a possibility too.

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= axj]And didn't the C's basically say that aliens would not allow us to blow up "their" planet? The fact that UFO's have often been sighted at nuclear facilities and even deactivated them at times, points towards this being a possibility too.[/quote]

Yes, weird kind of relief actually but 4STS does not want to lose their 'farm' But what if their 'farm' becomes less productive? Better to let the species destroy each other and start over?


The C's also told us that the annihilation of the Arab people (true Semitic) is 4STS priority? Even if that all doesn't goes exactly as plan, they still have nuclear Israel to do it for them. It would also mean the end for Israel of course.

But maybe Israel was never created to last but just to perform this one task. It's a thought I can't help to shake.


[quote author= axj]Most of them spent too much effort on establishing their power, though if that starts to slip away, all bets are off. As of now, I'd say they are still pretty comfortable.[/quote]

Yeah, probably. Anyhow I think they are aiming on their fixed outcome for the next global economic depression first to swift the balance of power in their favor. ''New world Order'' and all that. They might have some 'end of the world' scenario's in their playdeck. But only as a last resort like you said.

 

[meta-agnostic]

Michael Moore has come out with a rant about how he knows Trump never wanted to be president in the first place and only ran to be able to leverage more money for his TV show. It's been picked up by a few alternative news outlets.

_http://michaelmoore.com/TrumpSabotage/

Is Trump Purposely Sabotaging His Campaign? by Michael Moore

Friends,

Donald Trump never actually wanted to be President of the United States. I know this for a fact. I’m not going to say how I know it. I’m not saying that Trump and I shared the same agent or lawyer or stylist or, if we did, that that would have anything to do with anything. And I’m certainly not saying that I ever overheard anything at those agencies or in the hallways of NBC or anywhere else. But there are certain people reading this right now, they know who they are, and they know that every word in the following paragraphs actually happened.

Trump was unhappy with his deal as host and star of his hit NBC show, “The Apprentice” (and “The Celebrity Apprentice”). Simply put, he wanted more money. He had floated the idea before of possibly running for president in the hopes that the attention from that would make his negotiating position stronger. But he knew, as the self-proclaimed king of the dealmakers, that saying you’re going to do something is bupkus — DOING it is what makes the bastards sit up and pay attention.

Trump had begun talking to other networks about moving his show. This was another way to get leverage — the fear of losing him to someone else — and when he “quietly” met with the head of one of those networks, and word got around, his hand was strengthened. He knew then that it was time to play his Big Card.

He decided to run for President.

Of course he wouldn’t really have to RUN for President — just make the announcement, hold a few mega-rallies that would be packed with tens of thousands of fans, and wait for the first opinion polls to come in showing him — what else! — in first place! And then he would get whatever deal he wanted, worth millions more than what he was currently being paid.

So, on June 16th of last year, he rode down his golden escalator and opened his mouth. With no campaign staff, no 50-state campaign infrastructure — neither of which he needed because, remember, this wasn’t going to be a real campaign — and with no prepared script, he went off the rails at his kick-off press conference, calling Mexicans “rapists” and “drug dealers” and pledging to build a wall to keep them all out. Jaws in the room were agape. His comments were so offensive, NBC, far from offering him a bigger paycheck, immediately fired him with this terse statement: “Due to the recent derogatory statements by Donald Trump regarding immigrants, NBCUniversal is ending its business relationship with Mr. Trump.” NBC said it was also canceling the beauty pageants owned by Trump: Miss USA and Miss Universe. BOOM.

Trump was stunned. So much for the art of the deal. He never expected this, but he stuck to his plan anyway to increase his “value” in the eyes of the other networks by showing them how many millions of Americans wanted Him to be their Leader. He knew, of course (and the people he trusted also told him) that there was no way he was actually going to win many (if any) of the primaries, and he certainly would not become the Republican nominee, and NEVER would he EVER be the President of the United States. Of course not! Nor would he want to be! The job of being President is WORK and BORING and you have to live in the GHETTO of Washington, DC, in a SMALL 200-yr. old house that’s damp and dreary and has only TWO floors! A “second floor” is not a penthouse! But none of this was a worry, as “Trump for President” was only a ruse that was going to last a few months.

And then something happened. And to be honest, if it happened to you, you might have reacted the same way. Trump, to his own surprise, ignited the country, especially among people who were the opposite of billionaires. He went straight to #1 in the polls of Republican voters. Up to 30,000 boisterous supporters started showing up to his rallies. TV ate it up. He became the first American celebrity to be able to book himself on any show he wanted to be on — and then NOT show up to the studio! From “Face the Nation” to “The Today Show” to Anderson Cooper, he was able to simply phone in and they’d put him on the air live. He could’ve been sitting on his golden toilet in Trump Tower for all we knew –and the media had no problem with any of that. In fact, CBS head Les Moonves famously admitted that Trump was very good for TV ratings and selling ads — music to the ears the NBC-spurned narcissist.

Trump fell in love with himself all over again, and he soon forgot his mission to get a good deal for a TV show. A TV show? Are you kldding – that’s for losers like Chris Harrison, whoever that is (host of “The Bachelorette”). He was no longer king of the dealmakers — he was King of the World! His tiniest musings would be discussed and dissected everywhere by everybody for days, weeks, months! THAT never happened on “The Apprentice”! Host a TV show? He was the star of EVERY TV SHOW — and, soon, winning nearly every primary!

And then… you can see the moment it finally dawned on him… that “Oh shit!” revelation: “I’m actually going to be the Republican nominee — and my rich beautiful life is f#*@ing over!” It was the night he won the New Jersey primary. The headline on TIME.com was, “Donald Trump’s Subdued Victory Speech After Winning New Jersey.” Instead of it being one of his loud, brash speeches, it was downright depressing. No energy, no happiness, just the realization that now he was going to have to go through with this stunt that he started. It was no longer going to be performance art. He was going to have to go to work.

Soon, though, his karma caught up with him. Calling Mexicans “rapists” should have disqualified him on Day One (or for saying Obama wasn’t born here, as he did in 2011). No, it took 13 months of racist, sexist, stupid comments before he finally undid himself with the trifecta of attacking the family of a slain soldier, ridiculing the Purple Heart and suggesting that the pro-gun crowd assassinate Hillary Clinton. By this past weekend, the look on his face said it all — “I hate this! I want my show back!” But it was too late. He was damaged goods, his brand beyond repair, a worldwide laughing stock — and worse, a soon-to-be loser.

But, let me throw out another theory, one that assumes that Trump isn’t as dumb or crazy as he looks. Maybe the meltdown of the past three weeks was no accident. Maybe it’s all part of his new strategy to get the hell out of a race he never intended to see through to its end anyway. Because, unless he is just “crazy,” the only explanation for the unusual ramping up, day after day, of one disgustingly reckless statement after another is that he’s doing it consciously (or subconsciously) so that he’ll have to bow out or blame “others” for forcing him out. Many now are sensing the end game here because they know Trump seriously doesn’t want to do the actual job — and, most importantly, he cannot and WILL NOT suffer through being officially and legally declared a loser — LOSER! — on the night of November 8th.

Trust me, I’ve met the guy. Spent an afternoon with him. He would rather invite the Clintons AND the Obamas to his next wedding than have that scarlet letter (“L”) branded on his forehead seconds after the last polls have closed on that night, the evening of the final episode of the permanently cancelled Donald Trump Shit-Show.

Yours,
Michael Moore

Postscript:
Don, if you’re reading this, do it soon. Give your pathetic party a chance to pick up the pieces and nominate Ryan or Romney so they can be the ones to lose the White House, the Senate, the House and yes, praise Jesus and the Notorious RBG, the Supreme Court. Don’t be too hard on yourself. You’re only the logical conclusion to a party that has lived off the currency of racism and bigotry and fellating the 1% for decades, and now their Trump has come home to roost.

True or not? And how much will it matter the closer we get to November 8th?

 

[lilies]

Scott Adams (the guy who writes Dilbert) has written a lot about Trump in his blog. Adams, who always struck me as a bit creepy, studies hypnosis and manipulation as a hobby, and says Trump is a master at this (he calls him a wizard). A lot of the things he says that sound like gaffes or random shooting off of his mouth are actually well crafted. He predicted Trump would win this thing last summer.
[..]

Everything he says is well crafted by his professional spellbinder team writing his speeches, I think. The slips, going off script for a bit and bloopers don't really have any effect in the long run, since the well repeated carefully written suggestive elements and hypnotic parts already infected peoples brains during his campaign, (in my opinion).

Same hypnotic, suggestive elements of speech - Lizard-Speak - are well recognizable coming out from Killary's mouth too. She too is probably employing a herd of expert writers to maximize her charm during speeches. Revolting to think about how skillful academics are willing to work for these psychopaths, because speech writing apparently pays so well:
_https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Favreau_%28speechwriter%29

 

[Mr. Premise]

Scott Adams (the guy who writes Dilbert) has written a lot about Trump in his blog. Adams, who always struck me as a bit creepy, studies hypnosis and manipulation as a hobby, and says Trump is a master at this (he calls him a wizard). A lot of the things he says that sound like gaffes or random shooting off of his mouth are actually well crafted. He predicted Trump would win this thing last summer.
[..]

Everything he says is well crafted by his professional spellbinder team writing his speeches, I think. The slips, going off script for a bit and bloopers don't really have any effect in the long run, since the well repeated carefully written suggestive elements and hypnotic parts already infected peoples brains during his campaign, (in my opinion).

Same hypnotic, suggestive elements of speech - Lizard-Speak - are well recognizable coming out from Killary's mouth too. She too is probably employing a herd of expert writers to maximize her charm during speeches. Revolting to think about how skillful academics are willing to work for these psychopaths, because speech writing apparently pays so well:
_https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Favreau_%28speechwriter%29

Yes, that's what Scott Adams is saying now. That Hillary has hired even better "wizards" than Trumps and that's why she's leading. This happened apparently before the convention. Instead of going on about policies and proposals she's now going right to the fear factor/lizard brain fear of a Trump win.

 

[Renaissance]

Yes, that's what Scott Adams is saying now. That Hillary has hired even better "wizards" than Trumps and that's why she's leading. This happened apparently before the convention. Instead of going on about policies and proposals she's now going right to the fear factor/lizard brain fear of a Trump win.

I'd bet those wizards are now more involved in trying to associate Trump with the propaganda associated with Putin, than crafting clever language in her speeches. Seems to have been pretty effective too. I mean, she and the DNC were unequivocally exposed as fixing the Democratic primaries and with just a few unsubstantiated claims of Trump having ties with Putin, and not only is she off scot-free, but she's now in the lead! Some of those polls have been fixed, but it doesn't take much to sway public opinion as to what they should think and accept.

 

[Beau]

There's an interesting article on SOTT discussing the competing factions that Trump and Clinton represent and what their goals are:

Save the US or save the bankers: Your choice for president in November will be between competing factions of global financial elites

Most experts would agree that Hillary Clinton represents the Democratic party, and Donald Trump, the Republican. But this approach is wrong.

Several years ago, I described in my articles and lectures a growing rift in the global elite. Pretty much united since 1945, in 2011 the elites split into two factions, mainly in reaction to dramatically falling profits at the top global banks following the 2008 financial crisis.

The global banks, which are the main instruments of global control by the financial elite (not the governments, as most people believe), are currently losing money, despite the fact that the dollar is being artificially supported.

By 2014, non-inflationary methods had been exhausted, forcing the Fed, under pressure from the Obama administration, which was worried about inflation, to stop printing dollars.

The global financial elite responded by trying to replace the Fed with a new, global Central Bank, a "Central Bank of Central Banks", thereby depriving the US of the ability to issue the world's reserve currency.

US financial interests blocked this project with the "Strauss-Kahn affair", leading to the above mentioned rift. It is a basic disagreement about how the global economy should develop in the coming years. Put simply, it is a disagreement about whether to save the global banks at the expense of the US economy, or to save the US economy at the cost of a global financial collapse.

In 2014, I described these two scenarios at a Dartmouth Club meeting in Dayton, Ohio. I noted that American voters had identified the first scenario with the Democratic Party, and the second - with Republicans, leading to their landslide victory in the mid-term elections.

However, this is a popular misconception, and, in fact, support for the competing options crosses party lines.

For example, Bush is much closer to Clinton on this issue than Clinton is to Sanders, who himself is close to Trump. One could call the Bush-Clinton camp the "Financiers Faction", and Trump-Sanders camp the "Isolationist Faction." The reason that the "Financiers" back the first option is that the destruction of the global financial system would lead to regional control of the world. Again, it is through its global financial institutions that the US controls the world, and not its military, as some still believe.

Clinton supports monetary easing, a euphemism for supporting transnational banks, while Trump favors tightening monetary policy and financial restructuring, relieving companies and households of their debt. Trump is willing to accept regional leaders (including Russia) as partners, while Clinton demands submission to American dictates. Trump believes negotiations can lead to peace and order, while Clinton's idea is a global 'Arab Spring', that would enable banks to write off their obligations and remain in control.

This rift is also behind other serious global problems. Regional elites, who are loyal to the "Financiers" who sponsor them, are desperately trying to help them by intimidating the public with terrorist attacks, which they blame on ISIS. Recall that it was Clinton and Petraeus who plotted to arm Al-Qaeda in Syria against Obama's wishes.

I think Trump will probably win because I think he will make clear to the voters that they are choosing not between political parties, nor even between two personalities, rather, between these two economic scenarios. Given the results of the 2014 mid-terms, I seriously doubt that they will vote to support the bankers at their own expense!

 

[JGeropoulas]

Here's a recent poll based on responses from 1526 voters, which were then weighted proportionally via a simple electoral based system for the parties polled.

To calculate the poll results, each political affiliation controlled 1 point for each percent they represent of the population:

23 points for Republicans, 39 points for Independents and 32 points for Democrats. The remaining 6% of the population apparently fell into other categories (i.e. "unregistered"?).

This method allowed them to take an unlimited number of opinions from each party and still get an accurate representation of the actual popular consensus. Rather than pitting an even amount of Republicans and Democrats against each other and almost ignoring the Independent voters, they wanted to truly represent the numbers.

The results?

Trump 73
Clinton 21

The polls cited by the mainstream media certainly tells a different story, but then, what else is new? Yet these numbers do seem consistent with the ratio of supporters at each candidate's rallies. On the other hand, this poll may be completely fabricated.

You can see the summary results and raw data here:

_https://therealstrategy.com/trs-poll-shows-trump-ahead-52-points/

 

[NormaRegula]

Goodness, it's getting interesting, if what Michael Moore writes is even half true.

If Trump does get elected, will there be a reality show with The Donald and Melania moping about their boring lifestyle now that they're closeted in that shabby cottage called the White House? Will Melania redecorate? Will there be segments with world leaders and opposing party members pontificating or making snide comments about them during visits? The possibilities are endless. Paging NBC...

 

[whitecoast]

Michael Moore has come out with a rant about how he knows Trump never wanted to be president in the first place and only ran to be able to leverage more money for his TV show. It's been picked up by a few alternative news outlets.

_http://michaelmoore.com/TrumpSabotage/

Normally I have little respect for Moore either as an activist or as a film producer, but this goes to an entirely new low. His entire rant makes no sense to me. Just look at it with game theory.

If we start by stating the obvious fact that Trump wants more opportunities to make money, he'd have far more as President than as a simple reality TV host. Cutting deals for friends, insider trading, the works would be available to him in such a position.

If we give Moore the benefit of the doubt by saying he started to campaign SOLELY as a means to acquire leverage for his media image (a big indulgence IMO), and also give him that Trump's campaign has been successful beyond his dreams, why on earth would Trump reduce his momentum and throw away the race? Not only is Trump smart enough to see he could make far more wielding presidential power, he also has an enormous yet fragile ego. Trump HATES to lose - this is a character trait thoroughly in line with his personality (high extroversion, extremely low agreeableness, medium to high neuroticism). If such an individual is on the cusp of winning "the highest office in the land", what kind of psychologically ignorant person would predict him to suddenly start pulling his punches?

Aside from his usual gatekeeping nonsense, Moore (apparently?) suffers from an egotism of the natural worldview, thinking nobody could possibly say those things and mean them. Perhaps Trump does or perhaps he doesn't. Either way Moore is not equipped to see the extent to which this political reality diverges from humanity and common sense; or perhaps he is and is a willful agent of disinfo. Think this famous "documentarian" will ever produce something about psychopathy in the halls of corporate, scientific and political power? Oho! I don't think so.

If he was a wine bottle I'd cork him. /rant.

 

[angelburst29]

This whole Presidential election is turning into a full blown fiasco?

The Federal Election Commission has released a statement saying that they will be cracking down on “unlawfully false or fictitious” candidates like “Deez Nuts,” who have been consistently polling better than some actual third-party candidates.

‘Deez Nuts’: US Elections Officials Officially Fed Up With Fake Candidates
http://sputniknews.com/us/20160819/1044447058/fec-cracking-down-deez-nuts.html

The FEC announced on Thursday that they will now be sending verification letters to those who attempt to register fake candidates, and fraudsters could face fines.

“The Commission has authorized staff to send verification letters to filers listing fictional characters, obscene language, sexual references, celebrities (where this is no indication that the named celebrity submitted the filing), animals, or similarly implausible entities as the name or contact information of the candidate or committee,” the statement read.

They have also created a new procedure and hired staff to “verify information in filings from the 2016 election cycle that appear to be unlawfully false or fictitious.” (Note - Why haven't they done this from the beginning?)

“The new procedure comes in response to an increase this election cycle in the filing registration and statement of candidacy forms (FEC Forms 1 and 2) that provide patently false candidate or treasurer names, questionable contact or bank information, or material that does not relate to campaign finance, such as drawings, essays and personal court records,” according to the statement.

The FEC explained that new staff will warn those filing questionable candidates that they could face penalties including fines if they continue their pranks.

“Deez Nuts,” a candidate in the 2016 election cycle ended up being a 15-year-old teen from Iowa named Brady Olson, who later endorsed Bernie Sanders. The fictitious character was polling at nearly 10% in some surveys.

Though Deez Nuts dropped out in August, it is still polling ahead of Green Party nominee Jill Stein in Texas, according to a poll released this week.

Olson had registered the fictitious candidate in the summer of 2015. Other candidates registered during the election cycle included "Butt Stuff," "Master Alexander Soy Sauce and Taters Gordh First,” and "Limberbutt McCubbins," apparently the name of a cat.

 

[angelburst29]

Trump was just in Louisiana. Apparently, he "quietly" donated an 18 wheeler full of supplies and food.

Shhhh – CNN Accidentally Stumbled Upon, and Broadcasts, Donald Trump Supply Donation to Louisiana…
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/08/19/shhhh-cnn-accidentally-stumbled-upon-and-broadcasts-donald-trump-supply-donation-to-louisiana/

Days before candidate Donald Trump announced his intention to visit the flood ravaged area of Louisiana, he had already put in place a donation (a full 18 wheeler) of supplies for the victims of the flood.

CNN accidentally stumbled upon the donation, and Brooke Baldwin reported on it during a 90 second segment. Don’t worry, they won’t air it again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-fF-Cxhz_E

While Donald Trump and Mike Pence were visiting with Franklin Graham and the fine folks of Samaritans Purse, the donation was quietly being off-loaded in another location.

Donald Trump met with several families, and gave them a message of support and hope. “Stay strong, you’re going to rebuild”.

The security agents assigned to candidate Trump are very protective, twitchy about close physical contact – but Donald Trump reassures them all will be ok.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoZ3-9QJqXc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6qYuUGK77o

 

[angelburst29]

Interesting short interview on how Killary is losing to Trump.

CLINTON COLLAPSE: INSIDERS SAY MAY DROP "SOON"
http://www.realtruenews.org/single-post/2016/08/07/CLINTON-COLLAPSE-INSIDERS-SAY-MAY-DROP-SOON

 

[whitecoast]

Interesting short interview on how Killary is losing to Trump.

CLINTON COLLAPSE: INSIDERS SAY MAY DROP "SOON"
http://www.realtruenews.org/single-post/2016/08/07/CLINTON-COLLAPSE-INSIDERS-SAY-MAY-DROP-SOON

Really interesting, especially the comments toward the end to use Black Lives Matter to disrupt and cause the debates to be cancelled.
Even ignoring the end, it's clear that Hillary's instability is an open secret at the DNC. I've decided just to quote it at length here since it's interesting all in its own right.

Insiders say the Hillary camp is panicked--possibly on the verge of collapse. Not only is Trump's polling far better than the media narrative shows but the even more predictive Social Media scene has collapsed to "landslide" proportions in favor of Donald Trump. While Brietbart and The Gateway Pundit had covered the publicly available data, we used some of our benefactors extensive resources to try to get a look inside the Social Media response center of the Clinton Campaign.

We'll tell you: the shop they run is tight. Fear--terror, really--of Mrs. Clinton goes a long way to keeping people in line--but now that the cracks have started we were able to compromise a key person inside the sequestered Media Room run by David Brock's "Internet Warrior Virgins" (his term, not ours).

This is what we learned.

RealTrueNews: "We understand that a lot of attention has been paid to the 'social media' campaign by the Clinton campaign--and it's not working out?"

DNC Source: "An understatement. Hillary inherited Obama's 'Victory Lab' and analytics--but that was all geared to 2012 which was still pretty primitive by today's standards--and to Mitt Romney who might as well have been a caveman by today's standards. Things . . . changed. [quietly] Hillary didn't."

RTN: "What do you mean? What things changed?"

DNC: "I could give you all the stats about social media penetration and stuff--but what really changed? Trump. Trump is what changed. None of the old strategies work on him."

RTN: "What do you mean?"

DNC: "It's pretty obvious--ask any veteran of the Hillary-Clinton battle of '08. Or Obama vs. McCain--or Romney even. What'd we call our opponents?"

RTN: "Called your opponents?"

DNC: "Racists. We called our opponents racist. It worked--like, 93-98 times out of a hundred--people would back down. Run. Back then there was zero counter-narrative. McCain played it soft-ball. Romney was pretty clean but he wasn't ready to get nasty and take the heat. All their surrogates? Allies? Only Sarah Palin had the woman-card. That was it. We crushed them. Their online-portion of the vote? It was smaller than today--but they were demoralized. Shut down."

RTN: "So that was intentional."

DNC: "Totally. It tested through the roof. It did this time too--the focus groups? Say Donald Trump is racist? It'd work on them about 83 points--it came down due to saturation--but that'd be more than enough."

RTN: "So? What changed?"

DNC: "None of our focus groups were Trump voters. We just didn't bring any of them in at the start. We tried racist. We tried misogynist. We tried anti-Islam. It worked on our focus people. On Trump voters? No effect--reverse even."

RTN: "What do you mean reverse?"

DNC: "It made them stronger--more committed. I've never seen anything like it. It's like Trump didn't collapse when we tired it on him and suddenly it didn't work any more."

RTN: "Was there . . . other stuff?"

DNC: "The social media front might be the biggest deal going. Right now tests have shown that attack-ads almost never have any lasting impact. Events like conventions? Like debates? They determine who answers the phone--not who changed their vote. But social media? That's your kids being on your back--or your buddies. That has a real, lasting impact. That actually moves votes in a way we can track. Around May our High Command said we had this in the bag.

It's not in the bag."

RTN: "Can you be a little more explicit?"

DNC: "I can't get caught saying this. None of us are gonna have careers when this is over but there are . . . other concerns."

RTN: "Can you say what?"

DNC: [ flatly ] "No."

RTN: "What can you say?"

DNC: "We bought fake followers. That used to be what everyone did. Trump? His guys are all real. We've got media-established narratives. Our coms-team works with the major outlets to shape the stories. That's traditional. He doesn't even have a Coms Team--he just fires off tweets and they all go viral. Every last damn one. "

"We have our response team go hard--racist. Sexist. Social Justice up the ass. It just pisses everyone off. It changes nobody's mind. We've got Black Lives Matter. He's got Milo [ Yiannopoulos ]. We've paid like--like 300k for Politico. They paid nothing and they've got Brietbart. You know who Trump voters trust? Brietbart. Look at the numbers."

[ shakes his head ]

"Hillary's in a panic. She's always been on some kind of medication--but they've been upping the hell out of it. She's freezing. She's having panic attacks. The Secret Service is trained to get her out of these . . . fugue states--but one's going to happen in public and it'll all be over. Why do you think she doesn't talk to the press? No one knows what to do about the debates. It's going to be a disaster."

RTN: "Wasn't there an issue with the scheduling or something?"

DNC: "We want to minimize exposure everywhere we can. With press questions. With Sanders. And so on. So we work with the NFL on scheduling. Sure--Trump complains--but he's not going to bail. That's a problem. We don't think she can last 30 minutes with him under optimal conditions."

RTN: "So what IS the plan?"

DNC: "Nobody knows right now. I'm hearing drop out and give it to Tim Kaine. I'm hearing have some kind of big Black Lives Matter 'event' around the debates to get them canceled. I saw--"

[ trails off ]

RTN: "What?"

DNC: "You know the FBI's counter-terrorism playbook involves encouraging radicals to take extra steps to see if they will and then busting them?"

RTN: "We have."

DNC: "There's a plan to use assets inside the FBI--compromised agents--to have one of these go-too-far schemes actually not get stopped. Have something go wrong. Deliver guns--explosives--whatever to these radicalized groups and then instead of busing them . . . the event happens. That way it could be timed and targeted since it's actually agents doing the planning. I've seen a plan tor an event near the first debate--State of Emergency. Local Martial Law. It'd soft-kill the whole thing."

[ goes silent ]

RTN: "Can you tell us--"

DNC: [ leaves ]